Sobier J.T.C.C.: — The appellant appeals from the assessments by the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) whereby the Minister assessed the appellant pursuant to the provisions of subsection 160(1) of the Income Tax Act (the “Act”) in respect
Mogan J.T.C.C.: — In this appeal for the 1992 taxation year, the only issue is whether a certain amount of $15,000 is required to be included in computing the appellant’s income. That amount was received in 1992 from her former husband in
Sobier J.T.C.C.: — The appellant elected to have his appeals, from the assessments of the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) for his 1987 and 1989 taxation years, heard under the Informal Procedure.
McArthur J.T.C.C.: - These appeals were heard in Edmonton under the Informal Procedures of this Court with respect to the Appellant’s 1991 and 1992 taxation years.
Beaubier J.T.C.C.: This matter was heard at Vancouver, British Columbia pursuant to the General Procedure on September 15, 1995. The appellant (“Tetrad”) called James Wilson, its sole shareholder; Robert Moeller, C.A., its accountant; and Barbara English, Revenue Canada’s
Bonner J.T.C.C.: - The issue in this appeal is whether the Appellant is entitled under section 118.3 of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985 (5th Supp.), c. 1 (the “Act”) to a disability deduction for 1992 in respect of the
Sobier J.T.C.C.: — The appellant appeals from assessments by the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”), for his 1988, 1989 and 1990 taxation years.
Christie A.C.J.T.C.: — This is a motion brought by the appellant (“the Applicant”) for approval by the Court of a form of special case prepared by its counsel.
Garon J.T.C.C.: — These are appeals from income tax assessments issued by the Minister of National Revenue for the 1987 and 1988 taxation years. By those assessments, the Minister of National Revenue included the amounts of $10,450 and $4,745 in
P.R. Dussault J.T.C.C.: — This is an appeal of an assessment for the appellant’s 1989 taxation year whereby the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) refused the deduction of an amount of $52,387 being the balance carried forward in that
